Che!

59 Responses to Che!

1. thedogsdanglybits says:

   May 12, 2005 at 12:41 am

   Back to the Che topic and mention of the Troubador earlier in this thread (can’t find it now ?? so to recap description: lefty sort of coffee bar reportedly in Brompton Road although I remember it in the Kings Road but this was the late 60’s so it’s a wonder I can remember anything – like wow man.)
   Anyway, got into one of those while we were young discussions with a contemporary and ended up on the Argentinian Atrocisist.
   Bounced all around the net pulling up first hand accounts of his barbarity. Result – Apparently the sun still blazes from his fundamental orifice. And she’s been to the septic isle. Twice. Get too close to the tender bits and you get a diatribe on the evil Pinochet who apparently murdered everybody west of the Andes.
   Personally.

   Point I’m trying to make here is that arguing with a lefty about the sainted Che is like disputing transubsistantion with the Pope. For the left he gives a bunch of atheists a Christ figure to hang their belief system on. Even down to the wandering in the desert myth. Wonder why nobody’s ‘discovered’ his mother was a virgin. When you critisise their documentary you might as well be rubbishing ‘Songs of Praise’

      0 likes
2. Rob Read says:

   May 12, 2005 at 11:09 am

   thedogsdanglybits

   Lets make some pinoCHEt t-shirts!

      0 likes
3. David Field says:

   May 12, 2005 at 1:36 pm

   Monkey and others –

   The idea that the Anglosphere was immune to Nazi-style currents of thought is ridiculous. HG Wells called for the extermination of “savage races”. Winston Churchill called for the use of poison gas on primitive tribes.
   Anti semitism was rife: read some of Saki’s Edwardian novels for instance. The USA had a strict separation of black and white races backed up by some truly savage laws.

   Hitler was no enemy of the British Empire. He foresaw a long period of co-oepration with the Empire. Essentially he would be allowed much of Africa and Eurasia in return for peace and co-operation.

      0 likes
4. Verity says:

   May 12, 2005 at 2:50 pm

   Pete_London asks the astute question, what is the distinction between ‘gay’ and gay. Maybe its similar to the distinction between ‘idiot’ and idiot. I would concur – just a wild stab in the dark, mind you, that probably any Islamic country would offer richer pickings for intolerance than the state legislature of Alabama.

      0 likes
5. Monkey says:

   May 12, 2005 at 3:46 pm

   Talking of book censorship, has anybody else noticed that the shelves of almost every single bookstore in this country are stacked to the left?
   For every 1 conservative book there will be at least 30 anti-capitalist, anarchist, anti-american books.

   They even give Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore their own stands.

   In fact, the only way that you can keep track of new Conservative books (i.e. Peter Hitchens, James Bartholomew, David Horrowitz etc) is to go to amazon.com.

   There is absolutely no diversity whatsoever. Surely we ought to be more concerned about the Conservative book blackout in our own bookstores, than about some obscure Alabama library.

      0 likes
6. Cockney says:

   May 12, 2005 at 5:25 pm

   Monkey – not censorship but market forces.

   It’s the opposite to why right wing blogs are more popular.

   Left wing b*llocks is utterly dull hacked down into blog size soundbites but Moore-esque book length conspiracy theories can be mildly diverting once they’ve built up some steam.

   Hysterical right wing apocalyptic Hitchens-esque b*llocks is great fun in small doses but who the Hell would wade through an entire book of it? You’d be slitting your wrists by the second chapter.

      0 likes
7. JohninLondon says:

   May 12, 2005 at 9:10 pm

   What about Theodore Dalrymple then ? Bookshops never seem to have his excellent stuff.

      0 likes
8. thedogsdanglybits says:

   May 14, 2005 at 12:59 am

   Rob Read
   Nice idea Rob.
   And on the subject of S. American icons we have this from the Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/12/wallen12.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/05/12/ixportal.html on that martyr of the left; Salvador Allende. I wonder if his views are shared by that daughter of his who crops up on Radio 4 with such monotonous regularity. Perhaps Justin Webb could do an interview with her just to set our minds at rest.

      0 likes
9. Hilary says:

   May 25, 2005 at 3:06 pm

   An example of two counterpoints.

   Panorma’s feature ‘The Case Against Saddam’. An in depth documentary that looked at Saddam’s despotism uncompromisingly. Taken alone – a prime example of journalism that seems to support the coalition invasion.

   Adam Curtis’ The Power of Nightmares’. A three-parter that undermines the case for invasion and the ideology accompanying the war on terror. Taken alone – an apparent attack on the Blair-Bush line.

   Taken together…? A balance of views?

   Another example:

   the letter sent by Blair to Dyke,Sambrook and Davies requesting the BBC refrain from taking such an anti-war line has been cited by many as evidence that the BBC are and were underpressure to ‘get the anti-war voice off the airwaves’. Sambrooks subsequent memo to his journalists asks them to make sure that pro-war callers and writers-in are given equal airtime ‘to ensure balance and fairness’.

   Another letter, from Stephen Whittle (editorial policy) asks BBC journalists to ensure the anti-war voice is given a balanced hearing (“we must reflect significant opposition to allow the arguments to be heard and tested’. This has been cited as evidence that the BBC tried to undermine the coalition line.

   Taken together?……

      0 likes